diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'open_issues')
| -rw-r--r-- | open_issues/packaging_libpthread.mdwn | 47 |
1 files changed, 47 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/open_issues/packaging_libpthread.mdwn b/open_issues/packaging_libpthread.mdwn new file mode 100644 index 00000000..7594ae76 --- /dev/null +++ b/open_issues/packaging_libpthread.mdwn @@ -0,0 +1,47 @@ +[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2010 Free Software Foundation, Inc."]] + +[[!meta license="""[[!toggle id="license" text="GFDL 1.2+"]][[!toggleable +id="license" text="Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this +document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or +any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant +Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. A copy of the license +is included in the section entitled [[GNU Free Documentation +License|/fdl]]."]]"""]] + +[[!tag open_issue_libpthread open_issue_glibc]] + +IRC, #hurd, 2010-07-31 + + <tschwinge> My idea was to have a separate libpthread package. What do you think about that? + <youpi> in the long term, that can't work with glibc + <youpi> because of the thread stub stuff + <youpi> it's not really possible to keep synchronized + <youpi> because you have to decide which package you unpack first + <youpi> (when upgrading) + <tschwinge> Hmm, how is that different if two shared libraries are in one package vs. two packages? It isn't atomic either way? Aren't sonames / versioned library packages solving that? + <tschwinge> ... for incompatible forward changes? + <youpi> that'd be a mess to maintain + <youpi> Drepper doesn't have this constraint and thus adds members of private fields at will + <tschwinge> OK, but how is it different then if the libpthread is in the Hurd package? + <youpi> I'm not saying it's better to have libpthread in the Hurd package + <tschwinge> OK. + <youpi> I'm saying it's useless to package it separately when Drepper makes everything to have us put it along glibc + <tschwinge> Then, to goal is to have it in glibc? + <tschwinge> OK. :-) + <tschwinge> OK, I can accommodate to that. Isn't not that we'd want to switch libpthread to something else so quickly. + <tschwinge> So our official goal is to have libpthread in glibc, at least for Debian purposese? + <youpi> for any port purpose + <tschwinge> Ack. + <youpi> provided you're using glibc, you're deemed to ship libpthread with it + <youpi> because of the strong relations Drepper puts between them + <youpi> (just to remind: we already have bugs just because our current libpthread isn't bound enough to glibc: dlopen()ing a library depending on libpthread doesn't work, for instance) + <pinotree> yeah, pthread-stubs is linked to almost everywhere -lpthread isn't used + <pinotree> (would be nice to not have those issues anymore...) + <tschwinge> So -- what do we need to put it into glibc? We can make libpthread a Git submodule (or move the code; but it's shared also for Neal's viengoos, so perhaps the submodule is better?), plus some glibc make foo, plus some other adaptions (stubs, etc.) + <tschwinge> Does that sound about right, or am I missing something fundamental? + <youpi> I actually don't know what a git submodule permits :) + <youpi> looks like a good thing for this, yes + <tschwinge> Unfortunately I can't allocate much time at the moment to work on this. :-/ + <youpi> well, as long as I know where we're going, I can know how to package stuff in Debian + <tschwinge> That sounds like a plan to me. libpthread -> glibc as submodule. + <youpi> (note: actually, the interface between glibc and the libpthread is the responsibility of the libpthread: it gives a couple of .c files to be shipped in libc.so) |